The performance of cervical discectomy, excision of tissue, and neural element decompression procedures have become standard neurosurgical approaches for the treatment of disorders of the spine and nervous system, as may be caused, for example, by disc degeneration, osteophytes, or tumors. The compressive pathologies impinge onto a neural element, causing a compression of nerve tissue that results in a symptomatic response such as loss of sensation or strength, occurrence of pain, or other related disorders. The majority of these procedures are performed with an anterior approach to the cervical spine. Disc and bone tissue are removed, a neural decompression is achieved, and a spinal repair procedure is performed.
The current conventional repair procedure includes a vertebral fusion in which a biocompatible implant is inserted and secured between the affected adjacent vertebrae. A bone plate is then is rigidly attached to the two vertebrae adjacent to the implant, immobilizing these vertebral segments and preventing the expulsion of the implant from the intervertebral space. Subsequently, osteogenesis of the vertebrae into the implant occurs, and ultimately the adjacent vertebrae fuse into a single bone mass. The fusion of the vertebral segments, however, can lead to problematic results. For example, the immobility of the fused vertebral joint is commonly associated with the progressive degeneration of the adjacent segments, which, in turn, can lead to degeneration of the intervertebral discs on either side of the fused joint.
Implantation of an artificial disc device offers an alternate approach to vertebral fusion. The objective of the artificial disc device is to preserve the relative motion of the vertebrae across the joint and to restore normal articulating function to the spinal column. In spite of the benefits that these procedures have brought to patients, both fusion and disc replacement have inherent problems. The surgeries are extensive, recovery time is relatively long, and there is often a loss of function, particularly with the use of fusion implants. The long-term biocompatibility, mechanical stability, and durability of replacement disc devices have not been well established. Further, there is no clinical consensus that the use of a replacement disc reduces the risk of adjacent segment degeneration.
Methods for surgery on the spine and cervical discs from an anterior approach were first developed in the 1950's, and a number of variations have been developed since then. Each anterior cervical discectomy procedure, however, has had to face the challenge represented by removing the tissue overlaying the compressing lesion (i.e., the herniated disc material, osteophyte or tumor) after having dissected through the soft tissue anterior to the spine. Early procedures exposed the compressing tissue by first making a cylindrical bone-and-disc defect in the spine centered on the disc space in sagittal and coronal planes, and generally following the plane of the disc itself. Later procedures made use of a rectangular, box-like defect in the disc space centered on the disc space and generally following the plane of the disc.
Procedures recently developed by Jho (referenced below) were motivated by the concern that procedures like those described above destroyed more of the natural disc tissue than was necessary to remove a laterally-positioned disc herniation or osteophyte (a bone spur). An alternative procedure, an uncovertebrectomy, was therefore developed that involved the removal of only the lateral-most aspect of the disc space, and the vertebral bone above and below it, which together comprise the entire uncovertebral joint. (See Choi et al., “Modified transcorporeal anterior cervical microforaminotomy for cervical radiculopathy: a technical note and early results”, Eur. Spine J. 2007 Jan. 3; Hong et al., “Comparison between transuncal approach and upper vertebral transcorporeal approach for unilateral cervical radiculopathy—a preliminary report”, Minim Invasive Spine Surgery, 2006 October; 49 (5):296-301; and Jho et al., “Anterior microforaminotomy for treatment of cervical radiculopathy: part 1: disc-preserving functional cervical disc surgery”, Neurosurgery 2002 November; 51 (5 Suppl.): S46-53.) This new type of procedure allows much of the disc space to remain untouched. While preserving more of the disc space and disc material than its predecessor procedures, the uncovertebrectomy nevertheless does obliterate the uncovertebral joint, and there is concern in the field regarding the eventual development of spinal instability at that disc level. Further, drilling bone at high speed adjacent to the nearby vertebral artery and sympathetic nerve process increases the concern of a higher risk of vertebral artery, secondary soft tissue injury, and Horner's Syndrome.
In another refinement of the uncovertebrectomy procedure, an anterior cervical microforamenotomy, the uncinate process and the lateral disc tissue may be left largely intact as a hole is drilled through the bone adjacent to the disc space near the uncinate process. In both uncovertebrectomy and anterior microforamenotomy, the exposure and decompression of the neural elements generally follow the plane of the disc space. While vertebral artery injury and spinal instability remain concerns with both procedures, the risk associated with anterior microforamenotomy is considered less than that of uncovertebrectomy.
An additional refinement of both uncovertebrectomy and anterior microforamenotomy is a transcorporeal decompression procedure (also referred to as an upper vertebral transcorporeal foramenotomy or a transcorporeal discectomy) may have advantages. This procedure differs from its disc space-preserving precedent procedures in several ways. First, the axis of the access hole drilled to expose the compressing pathology (e.g., herniated disc fragment) does not parallel the plane of the disc, but instead entirely avoids the disc space plane anteriorly and captures the disc only at its most posterior aspect. Second, while uncovertebrectomy and anterior cervical microforamenotomy are applicable only to lateral pathology, the transcorporeal decompression is potentially applicable to compressing pathology located laterally in the disc space region, bilaterally, or in the midline. Further, the procedure is performed from a substantially medial position on the vertebra assuring maximal distance from the vertebral artery and other sensitive soft tissue and thereby minimizing the risk of accidental injury.
Multiple technical challenges remain, however, in optimizing the transcorporeal cervical decompression procedure for general surgical use. First, manually orienting and controlling a hand-held cutting tool to make an access channel is a subjective and error-prone procedure. The target pathology is wholly behind and/or within the bony structure of the vertebra and is not visible in any way when approached from a traditional anterior approach to the cervical spine. As the channel is essentially being driven blindly, it can easily fail to capture the targeted pathology being within the range of the posterior opening of the access channel. Consequently the surgeon needs to prolong the procedure, and explore the space by excising tissue until the pathology is found. The exploration typically leads to the access channel becoming larger than necessary and undesirably irregular, thus putting surrounding bone at risk of fracturing during or after the procedure. Given the proximity of many target pathologies to the uncovertebral joint and the vertebral artery, it is likely that exploration of the space will lead to removal of the stabilizing bone and disc tissue. This tissue damage or loss can cause spinal instability, and may further result in accidental perforation of the vertebral artery.
Second, a manual drilling process increases the risk of over penetration into the spinal canal, with highly undesirable consequences.
Third, the posterior longitudinal ligament, once exposed in the access channel, can be difficult to open. The objective is to remove the ligament cleanly from the access channel area so as to provide unobstructed visualization of the compressed neural tissue. Current surgical techniques are subjective and time-consuming, often producing a shredding of the ligament within the access channel rather than its removal therefrom, thereby impeding the visualization of the underlying target pathology or dura mater protective layer.
Fourth, currently available microsurgical instruments are not well-suited for retrieving the herniated disc or bone fragments that may be found deep to the posterior longitudinal ligament.
Fifth, after the decompression is complete, the present solutions for filling the void remaining in the vertebra are not completely satisfactory. Demineralized bone matrix putties or similar materials can fill the defect but they offer no resistance to the normal compressing or torsional forces until calcification occurs. Such materials may also impose a new source of compression on the exposed neural structures if too much putty is applied or if the vertebra deforms or sustains a compression fracture subsequently because of the absence of an implant that sufficiently resists compressive forces.
Sixth, after a solid implant plug is placed in the surgically-formed access channel, there is presently no anterior cervical plate suited to preventing its outward migration. Currently available anterior cervical plates are designed to be placed across two or more adjacent vertebrae at or near the midline, not laterally, as would be needed for lateral compressing lesions. Existing plates also are designed as motion-restriction or motion-prevention devices to be placed bridging across a disc space rather than onto a single vertebral body, consequently they are too large and are counterproductive in the application such as that described above where the objective is to preserve the articulation and relative motion of the adjacent vertebrae.
Accordingly, there is a need for a system and method whereby any compressing spinal pathology may be removed or moved so as to decompress the neural elements involved while desirably also (1) preserving native disc and bone tissue and the natural motion of the spine with natural disc material, (2) minimizing the risk of injury to the vertebral artery, (3) minimizing the risk of structural spinal instability, (4) minimizing the risk of an inadequate decompression, (5) minimizing the risk of injury to the protective dura mater layer, (6) minimizing the risk of post operative bleeding and/or (7) minimizing the risk of a subsequent vertebral body fracture due to an unrepaired defect within it.